I7 6700k vs a10-6800k

[not you]

Hello
I heared they have similar performance when gaming but the i7 is much much more expensive
Why is that?
It seems like the i7 does better in benchmarks but my cousin said its only bcs intel is paying for benchmark developers so it will favor intel cpus
Is this true?

I already bought the 6700k + a gtx 970 its just that im told that it was a waste of money bcs i could have just up my a6 5400k to an a10-6800k and be set
Could have that been a better option?

Thank you for your help

 

[Gingerbread]

No idea where you got that info but the 6700k has OVER 2x the performance of an A10-6800k.

 

[Aefuan]

The i7 6700k is one of the best CPU's you can buy nowadays. This APU will not be better, no way.

 

[migronesien]

The i7 is WAY better + wow you cousin is one hell of an AMD fanboy. No, it's not true. It's just, that there is no competition on the CPU market anymore. It's Intel all the way, except if you're on a tight budget.

 

[Gingerbread]

The i7 is WAY better + wow you cousin is one hell of an AMD fanboy. No, it's not true. It's just, that there is no competition on the CPU market anymore. It's Intel all the way, except if you're on a tight budget.

Even on a tight budget you should pretty much go for something like an i3-6100 lol, if you are going to buy something cheaper better buy a second hand pc, will do a better job ^^.

 

[not you]

My cousin is an expert conserning amd cpus but he doesnt care much for intel :/
Is it really that much of a difference? He said the fx 6300 will destroy any 4 core i7 bcs of superior corecount and the i7 5960x is on pair with the fx 8350 and is blown out of the water by the fx 9590 because of the superior cpu speed
Is this not true?

 

[Gingerbread]

That is like complete bullshit. FX 6300 can't even touch i5 cores, not to mention i7s. Just impossible.

 

[itech]

No offence but your cousin obviously knows very little about AMD, Intel or CPU's in general. Everything he has told you is rubbish and he shouldn't be handing out ill advice. The 6700k is an extremely powerful CPU and one that no AMD cpu could come close to matching. You can look at various independent benchmarks which prove this.

 

[not you]

^^ i was kind of thinking that looking at prices why would amd give a cpu (fx 9590) that can compete with a 5 times more expensive cpu?
And if they did why is it not out of stock jet?

But benchmarks are kind of suspicious to me too
http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-vs-AMD-FX-9590/3502vs1812
How could a 4 core cpu perform better than a 8 core thats very strange isnt it?

 

[guanyu210379]

It is not strange and it is not that simple.
Yes, Intel's 4 cores are faster than 8 AMD out-dated cores.
Intel has been improving the processor architecture in the last few years while AMD is still keeping the old stuffs and only OCing the available processors. FX9590 is only an OCed FX83xx and nothing more.
AMD stopped improving/innovating in this area since years, unlike Intel.
Processor performance can not be defined only by using clocking frequency or numbers of cores.
It is way more complex than that.
BTW: FX9590 is a total b*llsh*t to me, if you want AMD stick with the FX83xx and OC them yourself.

Not only via benchmark softwares, you can also find that games run better on Intel's processors.
These are the proof that Intel makes the better processors, as long as you can afford them.

 

[Aefuan]

But benchmarks are kind of suspicious to me too
http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-vs-AMD-FX-9590/3502vs1812
How could a 4 core cpu perform better than a 8 core thats very strange isnt it?

It's not strange. The reason is that usually each core from Intel is better than each core from AMD. Most programs are single core, so the quad-core can be better than the octa-core.

 

[not you]

Yes i can afford it i just thout that after spending almost the whole summer working at questionably morale student work companies
I gave my hard earned money to a company that is trying to compensate performance with corruption :/
Not a good feeling lol

 

[guanyu210379]

I have been switching between AMD and Intel (even VIA Cyrix at some points) since over 20 years.
I have also switched between ATI/AMD and nVidia (even Matrox, S3, etc. at some points) since years.
I am not an Intel fan boy and also not an AMD fan boy.

AMD processors were good but AMD unfortunately stopped innovating/improving the desktop processors since years.
It is not strange that Intel has the better processors today, since Intel is still improving their processors.

Yes, the FX6xxx, A8, A10, FX8xxx, etc. are not bad for budget systems but that is all about AMD processors today.
Anyone who said AMD FX6xxx or FX8xxxx can beat Intel top notch processor like the current i7s, he knows nothing and he tells only bullshit *sorry*.

 

[migronesien]

^^ i was kind of thinking that looking at prices why would amd give a cpu (fx 9590) that can compete with a 5 times more expensive cpu?
And if they did why is it not out of stock jet?

But benchmarks are kind of suspicious to me too
http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-vs-AMD-FX-9590/3502vs1812
How could a 4 core cpu perform better than a 8 core thats very strange isnt it?

Most games are using a maximum of 4 cores. Some might even only be able to make use of just 2 cores. And becasue Intels technology is far more superior, in terms of single core performance, Intel CPUs destroy AMD CPUs in pretty much any gaming scenario.

Here is an hierarchy chart for CPUs. Some new CPUs might be missing, but you'll get the point.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html

8+ Core CPUs will only be needed for heavy video editing, rendering or servers. And there again, Intels i7s (8 logicals cores) will totally destroy any AMD 8 core.

AMD starts to keep up with Nvidia for the GPU market, but CPUs? No chance.

Get the i7-6700k and you'll be set for years!

 

[not you]

^^ well my cousin is only using amd (both gpu and cpu) as he pionted out they always offer the best price to performance on every budget range
(Also he said amd is not releasing new cpus bcs they dont need to they offer the best ones anyway :/)

(I already own the i7 6700k that is what he is angry about )

 

[migronesien]

^^ well my cousin is only using amd (both gpu and cpu) as he pionted out they always offer the best price to performance on every budget range
(Also he said amd is not releasing new cpus bcs they dont need to they offer the best ones anyway :/)

(I already own the i7 6700k that is what he is angry about )

You should try running the same benchmark and wait for the part, where the CPU gets tested.

 

[not you]

Neither of us trust benchmarks
I tried the games we both own
(Shadow of mordor mad max metal gear solid 5)
My full spec
gigabyte gtx 970 g1 gaming
I7 6700k
Asus maximus viii hero
2x4gb ddr4 corsair vengance lpx 2666
Xfx pro series xxx 850w
Samsung sm951 pcie ssd 128gb
1tb wd black hdd
Zalman z11 plus
Raijintek triton aio
1440x900monitor

My cousins:
R9 280 sapphire
Fx 6300
ASRock 960GM-VGS3 FX
2x4gb kingston 1600 ddr3
Stock heatsink
2tb seagate hdd
Hkc 650w psu
(No idea what kind of case)
1600x900 monitor

But despite the differences both did around 60fps all maxed out real world gameplay with fraps ( shadow of mordor did a bit better on my build but metal gear solid v did a bit better on his)
But mine costed like double xD

Thats why he said amd can do the same as nvidia+intel but for half cost

 

[guanyu210379]

Try running Witcher 3 or Fallout 4 or GTA V @2560x1440 and you will see the difference, assuming you use the same GPU.

Yes, AMD processors are good for budget builds. You get what you paid.

 

[not you]

I use the gtx 970 but he said it doesnt matter as the r9 280 obliderates it bcs the 970 is a faulty card (refering to vram issues)

(But even if its worse i had reasons buying this card it has all maxwell features thoes are important for me and at the time of buying this it was the cheapest maxwell card)

The only other game i own that can hammer thiese builds is starcraft 2 but my cousin doesnt accept that bcs he said that is an "intel favoring" game bcs the devs were paid to make the game that way :/

(I have heared this was done by nvidia before i just couldnt belive blizzard would do this but companies only care about money it seems :/ )

 

[guanyu210379]

GTX970 is not a faulty card because of the VRAM-gate.
GTX970 is stronger than R9 280 in any way but for 1600x900 and 1440x900, both have no difference.
Again, try running those GPUs on higher resolutions and/or with other games.

The real rival for GTX970 is not R9 280 but the newer R9 390. Your cousin definitely does not know one single sh*t.

 

[not you]

Lol he said the 970 rivals with my old card the hd 7770 (which is a rebranded r9 270x) and is only more expensive bcs it has a bunch of new features
This is partly why i wasnt checking out the 750 ti :/

 

[guanyu210379]

How old is your cousin?

 

[not you]

31y (im 18) why??

 

[guanyu210379]

Just asking...
Usually, people, who really convinced about things without really searching for truth and facts, are only children or teens.
Adults or grown ups do not do those very often.

 

[not you]

Well he belives that only some real world benchmarks can be trusted as all benchmarks and some games development and optimization (like witcher 3) are manipulated by nvidia and intel